Japan Earthquake: Nuclear Plants at Fukushima Daiichi

[PietKuip]

If we look at the decay of Cl 38 it is a pure beta emitter. This means that if an analysis of this isotope was performed a chemical separation of the sample would be required for the analysis to take place because there are to many competing beta emitters to provide an accurate analysis. I really doubt that they would do this complex analysis at this point.

There are also gammas, see http://nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/nucleardata/toi/nuclide.asp?iZA=170038" . High probabilities (30 %) of emissions at 1.643 and 2.167 MeV. It is very easy to detect.

The only way that Cl 38 can be present at this late date is for neutron activation of the salt water coolant. I suspect this is an error - if it isn't big problem.

I agree. But the info is still there at http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/index.html" . It is insane. They should publish the gamma spectrum.

 

[|Fred]

Latest SEA Water analysis (unfortunately only available in Japanese at the time...) Source Nisa
http://k.min.us/ijHnOk.jpg

edited with English version from tepco http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11032603-e.html
[PLAIN]http://k.min.us/ijHpSg.jpg

@AntonL
Sewage pipes does not mean SFP but pipes linking the core to the turbine

 

[Fresno Phil]

The above seawater analysis is 330m from the south water outlet that serves 1-4 (5 & 6 use the north outlet I believe). They carried 500ml to Fukushima Dai Ni plant for analysis.

Column 1 is detected amount, Column 2 is Detection Margin Amount, I believe Column 3 is the legal maximum for nuclear plants, and Column 4 is the ratio of 1 over 3.

 

[|Fred]

Thank you Phil
could you please confirm my translation of this:
原子炉圧力容器へ淡水注入中 <= injection of "tap" water "tap" as in not seawater
Now (26th 8:00 JST) all 3 reactors are getting fresh water
In the past they stated
原子炉圧力容器へ海水注入中 note the symbol after the へ it changed from 海 (sea) to 淡 (Light)

Source latest http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110324006/20110324006-1.pdf

 

[AntonL]

@AntonL
Sewage pipes does not mean SFP but pipes linking the core to the turbine

and how do you explain water in reactor building 4.
and all happening at the same time?

sounds like an exterior catchment/retainment tank for fire fighting water, sprinkler systems etc being full and now overflowing into the basements. These catchment/retainment tanks are used under normal circumstance to collect fire fighting run off water such that it can be filtered and cleared before releasing into the environment. With all the water being pumped into the SFP one or two could be overflowing due to other breaches in the pool and draining into these tanks through the provided drains. Also spent fuel rods could be damaged from exposure to air and by the effect of the crashing heavy debry from the explosion into the pool smashing the rods, thus fission elements could well be in direct contact with the cooling water.

 

[AntonL]

Thank you Phil
could you please confirm my translation of this:

try http://translate.google.com

and status report http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/files/en20110325-5-3.pdf confirms fresh water to all reactors

 

[Bodge]

Speaking of lack of data, if you haven't seen the official reports from NISA, they are here:

http://www.meti.go.jp/press/

Specifically, the "Plant Parameter" reports have a wealth of data:

http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110326002/20110326002-3.pdf

If you understand plant construction and physics, these tell quite a story.

I would love to see a graph plotted from the data in the last 2 weeks of these releases.
.

 

[AntonL]

I would love to see a graph plotted from the data in the last 2 weeks of these releases.
.

Get to work! we are waiting for your graphs

http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110318...10318008-4.pdf
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110320...10320002-3.pdf
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110321...10321004-4.pdf
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110321...10321005-4.pdf
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110322...10322003-3.pdf
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110322...10322010-3.pdf (first temperature readings)
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110323...10323004-3.pdf
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110323...10323012-4.pdf
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/f...110324-2-4.pdf (reactor 4 temperature gauge not working after black smoke)
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/f...110325-1-4.pdf
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/f...110325-3-3.pdf
http://www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/f...110325-5-3.pdf (first fresh water injection)
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/20110326002/20110326002-3.pdf

Please add other links for other days if you can find them - I am especially interested in 19 March

 

[|Fred]

Well you stated that from your translation Japanese thought radiation came from the SFRP, I just stated that your translation was incorrect.
That aside I do share Tepco & Nisa opinion that it comes more likely from the reactor via leakage in the pipes.

 

[jlduh]

I would love to see a graph plotted from the data in the last 2 weeks of these releases

Yes that would be very interesting.

It woud be also interesting to include reactors 5 and 6 to use as reference because those are not damaged. Just note that reactor 6 is from an other generation of BWR (which explains its square building instead of the rectangular one). I believe it's a Mark II or Mark III containment (to be confirmed), it doesn't have a torus (to be confirmed also) so the parameters may be slightly different.

 

[jensjakob]

Good story - many leads and links;
http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/0...hima-1-explosions-and-19903.html?pagewanted=1

 

[jensjakob]

Gentlemen, I found this link to a quite interesting slideshow, showing the plausible meltdown of cores and #4 SFP, step by step:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2694784/posts
(Link is in first post)

 

[|Fred]

Thank you,
To summarize here is an hypothesis on the current situation made by Areva,
Does this scenario fit the available evidences?
[PLAIN]http://min.us/jjPB0E.jpg
[PLAIN]http://min.us/jjTYfc.jpg

 

[|Fred]

assuming the Unit 1 containment and vessel are flooded, how do we explain the reported stable and low water level in the vessel ? how do we explain recent pressure and temperature increase ? in both vessel and containment of unit 1 ?

 

[AtomicWombat]

Gentlemen, I read that on a French forum
and now the translation (sorry for the possible broken English)
and the screen shot

[PLAIN]http://www-laog.obs.ujf-grenoble.fr/~henri/Fukushima.gif

what's your opinion?

It appears the orange object is before the helicopter reaches the roof on reactor building 2 on its way to reactor building 3. So my opinion is that it is most unlikely to be the core of reactor 3 as it is in the wrong location.

The video you have linked is the clearest version I have seen of this video. From it I could tell that this mystery object:

Is the boom of a wheeled crane.

 

[AtomicWombat]

"...the three injured workers had stepped into was 10,000 times the level normally seen in coolant water at the plant. It said that the amount of radiation the workers were thought to have been exposed to in the water was two to six sieverts."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/26/world/asia/26japan.html?_r=3&hp=&pagewanted=all"

This is beginning to look more and more like Chernobyl, but perhaps in slow motion.

 

[Jakeh]

A more positive tone than previously from Japan's PM, (for whatever reason)

http://www.facebook.com/notes/prime...ecretary-edano-on-march-26th-/135183169887220

 

[Jakeh]

I don't think these have been posted before - but apologies if I'm repeating stuff.

The detail on the seawater tests (I assume):

http://eq.wide.ad.jp/files_en/110325ocean_1300_en.pdf

Radiation monitoring results (land, outside the perimeter of the exclusion zone):

http://eq.wide.ad.jp/files_en/110326fukushima3_1000_en.pdf

 

[AntonL]

Thank you,
To summarize here is an hypothesis on the current situation made by Areva,
Does this scenario fit the available evidences?

I am surprised that Areva, Europe's biggest builder of NPP would go public.
I checked the slide show - basically is the same as the picture I have made

 

[AtomicWombat]

'Two of the three have been hospitalised due to possible burns caused by beta rays, which can cause major skin damage.

They were not wearing boots at the time so their feet were soaked in the water.

TEPCO said almost no water was present during an on-site inspection the previous day and also that the level of radiation was low during the inspection.

"Because of this, the workers were believed to have continued their work even after their dosimeter alarm went off, assuming a problem with the machine," a TEPCO official said.

TEPCO plans to strictly reinforce the rule of evacuating the site whenever the dosimeter's alarm goes off.'

See:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/25/3173500.htm"

This is farcical.

 

[Borek]

To all:

Please stop speculating about these red spots. There is a lot of debris of all colors in the area, just because something is red or orange doesn't mean it is hot and glowing. IR pictures don't confirm anything near red hot, that would mean 500-800 deg C or above, IR pictures show hot spots several hundred degrees lower. Let's stick to facts, there is already enough misinformation circulating around.

 

[AtomicWombat]

If it is indeed the the top of the reactor it is in the wrong place, suggesting the reactor was destroyed by the explosion in building 3, which has been my "best guess" for some time.


Sorry if this has already been commented on; I've been away for a few days.

I think that the round feature is the top of the tank just above it

No jensjacob, the tank above and behind the mystery object originally had a flat top, as you will see if you look at older footage. There were no domed vessels near the base of building 3 - or on it.

 

[Jakeh]

If it is indeed the the top of the reactor it is in the wrong place, suggesting the reactor was destroyed by the explosion in building 3, which has been my "best guess" for some time.

Maybe Occam should take his Razor to that?

 

[AtomicWombat]

Now we can try to speculate if the smoke plume from this building is coming from this place or not, but if think it is (satellite picture just after the explosion, 14th or march):

http://www.netimago.com/image_182152.html

http://www.netimago.com/image_182153.html

Yes jlduh,
I think the smoke plume comes from multiple sources that are essentially the hole where number 3 reactor used to be.

Tcups has produced an impressive series of hypotheses. However, any failure mechanism must account for the extremely energetic explosion of the reactor 3 building. The vast majority of the energy of this explosion was directed upwards, so it is likely sourced inside the primary containment (reactor, dry-well, wet well). Since this was necessarily purged of oxygen prior to the explosion it must be either 1) a steam explosion, or 2) a chemical explosion not involving free oxygen (initially at least), or 3) a combination. (We can almost certainly rule out a nuclear explosion).

A final possibility is a rupture of the base of the reactor, producing a rocket effect due to its pressurisation (~2000psi) - blasting the reactor through the top of its containment. This would almost certainly have been prevented by safety pressure relief values, and is unlikely to have been this energetic in any case. Almost certainly the RV pressure would have been reduced markedy after the reactor was SCRAMed.

The best explanation consistent with the visual evidence is that the reactor core melted through the bottom of the reactor and fell into a flooded dry well. As I've discussed before, this would produce an explosive steam reaction, combined with a highly energetic reaction between superhot zirconium and water, producing hydrogen, that itself exploded once the top of the containment was breached.

After an energetic explosion in the RV it would be no surprise to find the circulation pipes have failed in the turbine building. After flooding the now open reactor with sea water (esp from the fire trucks - there is no evidence anything effective flooding was done before this) it is not surprising the turbine hall is full of contaminated water.

Nothing consistent or coherent has come out of TEPCO to enable a better understanding of what has happened. And I suspect even the water analyses have been selectively leaked (excluding important components) to control their story.

 

[TCups]

In the last days we discussed bullets (debris at high velocity) smashing through
neighbouring roofs let's call these falling debris, being material blasted high into the sky and
falling at high equally high velocity. Penetration holes can be seen on turbine building no
3 and in the latest SDF video from two days back, showed steam escaping through holes
of unit 2 roof - possibly also a bombs from rector 3 explosion.

What we have not discussed are these large chunks of debris falling into the SPF and destroying the
spent fuel rods and unit 3 also had 200 brand new rods. In this case the Zirconium
jackets could be destroyed and fission products exposed to the water in the pools

Anton:

It is possible but not very likely that high-lofted falling debris could have damaged SFP3 or other buildings and structures. My initial assessment was that the greatest force of the blast went upward, from the explosion video. But the subsequent photos of the damage on the ground told a different story, with the greatest visible damage appearing to have come from a sideways blast.

I eventually resolved this in my mind by the observation that it was the concrete slabs blasting outward from the building that became bullet or missile like projectiles that did the damage, east and west, and the falling crane, damage to the north. But why, then, if most of the damage appeared to be on the southeast end was there little or no visible damage to Bldg 4? I will come back to that

The vertical component went through much lighter roof panels and may have been less constrained going upward, plus channeled upward by the stronger structure of the weight bearing beams and concrete slab sidewall construction and perhaps the 3SFP, particularly if any large volume of water in the 3SFP was explosively vaporized.

When you consider the absence of north side projectile damage, I believe it is because neither the north or south sides of the upper floor had concrete slabs. The weight bearing function of the east and west walls was to support the weight of the two side rails and the large overhead crane. The reinforced wall structure and the large side rails of the crane helped to hold things together somewhat, with the side panels popping out. Absent concrete panels and weight-bearing columns north and south, there was little projectile blast damage southward other than lighter debris, and nothing to constrain the overhead crane from being blasted out the north wall, or simply rolling down the rails and out the side of the building if the north wall and a couple of the north columns collapsed. The north side damage was to the adjacent lower building, not the side of Bldg2.

On the recent discussion of the flooding of the basement of Turbine Bldg 3, there was a side elevation diagram that showed the relationship of the height of the top of Reactor Bldg 3 vs the top of Turbine Bbldg 3. That will give a bit more insight into the trajectory of the side wall panels that blew out, east and west.

So, in retrospect, I can see how a hydrogen explosion first exited Bldg 3 upward and southward.

As for vertical upward, then downward "bomb-like" (falling debris), there are not that many candidates for heavy debris that could have been blown straight upward. These, in my mind, were
1) section(s) of the roof panels (sheet metal) and girders (not that heavy)
2) the fuel handling machine (visible in RB4 but not in RB3 after the blast,
3) the reinforced concrete plug or sections of the plug atop the drywall containment of reactor 3
4) the contents of SFP3 itself

If the plug blew from the drywall containment, then I cannot see with certainty where it punched through the roof girders, or where it fell to earth, or why a jet of steam, apparently from the drywall containment of RV3 might be seen afterward. It would leave a huge gaping hole and voluminous billowing smoke for days (maybe). This scenario seems very unlikely to me

If the fuel rods were blown straight up and out of SFP3 by the explosion, how did a blast above the level of the SFP3 cause it? Perhaps residual water in the SFP vaporized explosively. Very speculative at best and also seems very unlikely.

That only leaves one "heavy" candidate, the fuel handling machine, and I doubt that did enough damage falling to displace any fuel rods.

Addendum: Per Anton's request, please note that any reference to "bombs" or "missiles" refer to falling or flying debris, and should not be interpreted otherwise. Apologies to any conspiracy theorists who may have misunderstood.

 

[AntonL]

It appears the orange object is before the helicopter reaches the roof on reactor building 2 on its way to reactor building 3. So my opinion is that it is most unlikely to be the core of reactor 3 as it is in the wrong location.

The video you have linked is the clearest version I have seen of this video. ...

I fully agree and if it is red hot where is the smoke? There would be enough debris around to ignite

The most watchable videos are here, that guy has nice software.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=KurtsFilmeVideo&aq=f

 

[AtomicWombat]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-sci-japan-quake-secrecy-20110325%2C0%2C3610246.story"

So its official now what we have been saying this all along

and in #1176 I wrote:
I personally feel that Tepco engineers are overextended, paralyzed and firefighting,
instead of having a set clear path of action with small deviations to solve the problem.
The question now arises if nuclear reactor accidents should be co-managed internationally,
an new task for the United Nations as they are the only body to enforce this.

and in #1195 I wrote:
All I want to say is that nuclear accident management need to be rethought and taken out
of the control of the operator. It would be of interest if the big nuclear nation to have a
national emergency manual that structures the accident management that takes immediate
effect with military like precision.

I think the LA Times article is suggesting more than just this. To be blunt, TEPCO are either knaves or fools, or some combination thereof. They are certainly playing the Japanese public and international community for fools. The whole thing is a ridiculous attempt at a cover-up that has gone on even longer than Chernobyl.

Not only that, many nuclear industry experts are too sensitive to criticism of their industry, especially at a time when things were starting to look up, until...Fukushima. If an insider comes out and says what they think is really happening that may be the end of their career.

Unfortunately that leaves Joe-public - especially the Japanese public - in the vulneravble position where almost no one with authority or expertise is acting in their interests.

We are left with informed and uninformed speculation. Is is quite likely that the work done on this site - despite the lack of consensus - is getting closer to the truth than anything coming from TEPCO, the IAEA, or other authorities.

 

[AtomicWombat]

The most watchable videos are here, that guy has nice software.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=KurtsFilmeVideo&aq=f

Thanks AntonL, these are great!

 

[TCups]

REGARDING THE EXPLOSION AT BLDG 3

The slide show of the proposed mechanism seems highly credible.
reference: http://www.scribd.com/doc/51564602?secret_password=th7hw1mmpjwnfmd0mbj

I see one obvious flaw, at least in the diagrammatic representation (diagram attached, again from above referenced slide show)

The explosion is shown occurring with a full SFP. There is a first hand account of large volumes of water sloshing out of one of the SFP's and onto a worker in the buliding (not sure which) at the time of the 9.0 quake. There is speculation that "damage" from the quake may have resulted in leaks and there are lots of calculations of the boil off time of water from the SFPs. But . . .

1) A hydrogen gas explosion occurred in Bldg 4 with an empty reactor core, and
2) as I pointed out earlier, the odds of the SFP's remaining full after the quake seem about the same as an open coffee cup in the cup holder of your car remaining full after driving over a dozen speed bumps without slowing down.
3) the explosion at Unit 3 was nothing like that at Unit 1, which occurred minutes after controlled venting at Unit 1.

Conclusion: there is no way to know the starting volume of water in any of the SFP's after the quake. Hydrogen gas from SFP's in 4 and quite possibly 3 may contributed to the explosions. Secondary damage to the SFP or reactor containment from the blast at Unit 3 cannot be dismissed as a possibility, as this slide would seem to indicate.

 

[|Fred]

About the orange object and stuff, it is getting old , especially considering the data that were provided.. We really want to guess what it is from pixel-peeping ? Then we at the very least should try to get the perspective right and try to get a 3D view of what and where it is..Outside the secondary containment , top of a vertical structure (look at black lines)..
there you are, I got some of it right I think


[PLAIN]http://k.min.us/imlv0i.jpg

 

[AntonL]

(edit I do not know my left from the right sorry for confusing)

check the bottom right hand corner and you will see the breeze over the warm pool just below the smoke/steam line

You will also see some junk sticking out of the water so my theory of bombs (falling debris) damagaing the fuel rods is feasible

 

[AtomicWombat]

REGARDING THE EXPLOSION AT BLDG 3

The slide show of the proposed mechanism seems highly credible.
reference: http://www.scribd.com/doc/51564602?secret_password=th7hw1mmpjwnfmd0mbj

I see one obvious flaw, at least in the diagrammatic representation (diagram attached, again from above referenced slide show)

The explosion is shown occurring with a full SFP. There is a first hand account of large volumes of water sloshing out of one of the SFP's and onto a worker in the buliding (not sure which) at the time of the 9.0 quake. There is speculation that "damage" from the quake may have resulted in leaks and there are lots of calculations of the boil off time of water from the SFPs. But . . .

1) A hydrogen gas explosion occurred in Bldg 4 with an empty reactor core, and
2) as I pointed out earlier, the odds of the SFP's remaining full after the quake seem about the same as an open coffee cup in the cup holder of your car remaining full after driving over a dozen speed bumps without slowing down.
3) the explosion at Unit 3 was nothing like that at Unit 1, which occurred minutes after controlled venting at Unit 1.

Conclusion: there is no way to know the starting volume of water in any of the SFP's after the quake. Hydrogen gas from SFP's in 4 and quite possibly 3 may contributed to the explosions.

Thanks TCups,

Excellent link.

To me the obvious flaw is the clear difference in explosion mechanisms of reactor 1 and reactor 3, as you point out. We agree on this and we are trying to work out why. Dr Matthias Bruan's explanation (your link) makes complete sense for reactor 1. It is not consistent with the reactor 3 explosion.

 

[dave2004]

Concerning the availability/non availability of data, there is an effort to collect unofficial (and most likely non calibrated) radiation data in Japan using private Geiger counters, don't know if it helps figuring out what is going, but haven't seen it mentioned here:

http://community.pachube.com/node/611#3d

David

 

[AntonL]

Thanks TCups,

Excellent link.

To me the obvious flaw is the clear difference in explosion mechanisms of reactor 1 and reactor 3, as you point out. We agree on this and we are trying to work out why. Dr Matthias Bruan's explanation (your link) makes complete sense for reactor 1. It is not consistent with the reactor 3 explosion.

Below my theory posted earlier

Here is a time line of the explosions and reported CV venting
Unit 1 - 12.03.2011 at 15:36 : CVv 15:00 on 12.03.11
Unit 3 - 14.03.2011 at 11:01 : CVv 09:20 on 13.03.11
Unit 4 - 15.03.2011 at 06:14
Unit 2 - 15.03.2011 at 06:20 : CVv 11:55 on 13.03.11

There is a correlation between Unit 1 CV venting and Hydrogen blast.

Below SFP data FU = fuel units followed by pool volume and heat load of the FU
Unit 1 - 292 FU 1200m3 60kW
Unit 2 - 587 FU 1425m3 400kW
Unit 3 - 514 FU 1425m3 200kW
Unit 4 - 1331 FU 1425m3 2000kW + 200 brand new FU (yes 2MW not a typo)

This sets a new light on my earlier proposal
Unit 1 exploded due to H2 leak of venting system - possibly Earth quake damage
Unit 2 to 4 exploded due to hydrogen generation from equipment pools.

 

[|Fred]

Picture of the operating floor of UNIT 6 (similar to the operating floor of the other unit)
According to an Japanese engineer who work on the design of the containment vessel of unit 4
[PLAIN]http://min.us/jjP5c0.jpg